Attachment A – Economic Impact Analysis The following tables summarize the Comptroller’s economic impact analysis of SABIC US Projects, LLC (project) applying to Gregory-Portland Independent School District (district), as required by Tax Code, 313.026 and Texas Administrative Code 9.1055(d)(2). Table 1 is a summary of investment, employment and tax impact of SABIC US Projects, LLC.

Applicant SABIC US Projects, LLC Tax Code, 313.024 Eligibility Category Manufacturing

School District Gregory-Portland ISD 2014-2015 Average Daily Attendance 4,311 County San Patricio

Proposed Total Investment in District $1,081,375,000 Proposed Qualified Investment $1,081,375,000 Limitation Amount $30,000,000 Qualifying Time Period (Full Years) 2022-2023

Number of new qualifying jobs committed to by applicant 85 Number of new non-qualifying jobs estimated by applicant 0

Average weekly wage of qualifying jobs committed to by applicant $1,142.48 Minimum weekly wage required for each qualifying job by Tax Code, 313.021(5)(B) $1,142.48 Minimum annual wage committed to by applicant for qualified jobs $59,408.80 Minimum weekly wage required for non-qualifying jobs $895.75

Minimum annual wage required for non-qualifying jobs $46,579

Investment per Qualifying Job $12,722,058.82

Estimated M&O levy without any limit (15 years) $90,131,487 Estimated M&O levy with Limitation (15 years) $32,301,299 Estimated gross M&O tax benefit (15 years) $57,830,188

Table 2 is the estimated statewide economic impact of SABIC US Projects, LLC (modeled).

Source: CPA REMI, SABIC US Projects, LLC Table 3 examines the estimated direct impact on ad valorem taxes to the region if all taxes are assessed.

Source: CPA, SABIC US Projects, LLC 1Tax Rate per $100 Valuation

Year Direct Indirect + Induced Total Direct Indirect + Induced Total2021 322 1,589 1911 $21,556,994 $172,443,006 $194,000,0002022 1066 5,503 6569 $71,420,981 $629,579,019 $701,000,0002023 535 3,485 4020 $35,424,748 $423,575,252 $459,000,0002024 85 1,141 1226 $5,049,748 $159,950,252 $165,000,0002025 85 706 791 $5,049,748 $119,950,252 $125,000,0002026 85 443 528 $5,049,748 $91,950,252 $97,000,0002027 85 307 392 $5,049,748 $75,950,252 $81,000,0002028 85 249 334 $5,049,748 $65,950,252 $71,000,0002029 85 239 324 $5,049,748 $62,950,252 $68,000,0002030 85 255 340 $5,049,748 $62,950,252 $68,000,0002031 85 285 370 $5,049,748 $65,950,252 $71,000,0002032 85 320 405 $5,049,748 $69,950,252 $75,000,0002033 85 357 442 $5,049,748 $75,950,252 $81,000,0002034 85 387 472 $5,049,748 $80,950,252 $86,000,0002035 85 417 502 $5,049,748 $86,950,252 $92,000,000

Employment Personal Income

Year

Estimated Taxable Value

for I&S

Estimated Taxable Value

for M&O

Gregory-Portland ISD I&S Tax Levy

Gregory-Portland ISD

M&O Tax Levy

Gregory-Portland M&O

and I&S Tax Levies

San Patricio County Tax

Levy

San Patricio Drainage

District Tax Levy

Estimated Total Property Taxes

Tax Rate1 0.1800 1.1200 0.4600 0.54072022 $50,152,500 $50,152,500 $90,275 $561,708 $651,983 $230,702 $271,160 $1,153,8442023 $239,549,362 $239,549,362 $431,189 $2,682,953 $3,114,142 $1,101,927 $1,295,172 $5,511,2402024 $583,972,500 $583,972,500 $1,051,151 $6,540,492 $7,591,643 $2,686,274 $3,157,364 $13,435,2802025 $575,508,413 $575,508,413 $1,035,915 $6,445,694 $7,481,609 $2,647,339 $3,111,601 $13,240,5492026 $566,875,786 $566,875,786 $1,020,376 $6,349,009 $7,369,385 $2,607,629 $3,064,927 $13,041,9412027 $558,372,650 $558,372,650 $1,005,071 $6,253,774 $7,258,844 $2,568,514 $3,018,953 $12,846,3122028 $549,997,060 $549,997,060 $989,995 $6,159,967 $7,149,962 $2,529,986 $2,973,669 $12,653,6172029 $541,747,104 $541,747,104 $975,145 $6,067,568 $7,042,712 $2,492,037 $2,929,064 $12,463,8132030 $533,620,897 $533,620,897 $960,518 $5,976,554 $6,937,072 $2,454,656 $2,885,128 $12,276,8562031 $525,616,584 $525,616,584 $946,110 $5,886,906 $6,833,016 $2,417,836 $2,841,851 $12,092,7032032 $517,732,335 $517,732,335 $931,918 $5,798,602 $6,730,520 $2,381,569 $2,799,223 $11,911,3132033 $509,966,350 $509,966,350 $917,939 $5,711,623 $6,629,563 $2,345,845 $2,757,235 $11,732,6432034 $492,122,765 $492,122,765 $885,821 $5,511,775 $6,397,596 $2,263,765 $2,660,760 $11,322,1212035 $474,903,574 $474,903,574 $854,826 $5,318,920 $6,173,746 $2,184,556 $2,567,661 $10,925,9642036 $458,286,927 $458,286,927 $824,916 $5,132,814 $5,957,730 $2,108,120 $2,477,820 $10,543,6702037 $442,251,739 $442,251,739 $796,053 $4,953,219 $5,749,273 $2,034,358 $2,391,122 $10,174,7532038 $426,777,660 $426,777,660 $768,200 $4,779,910 $5,548,110 $1,963,177 $2,307,459 $9,818,746

Total $14,485,418 $90,131,487 $104,616,905 $37,018,289 $43,510,171 $154,608,196

Table 3 Estimated Direct Ad Valorem Taxes without property tax incentives

Table 4 examines the estimated direct impact on ad valorem taxes to the school district and San Patricio County, with all property tax incentives sought being granted using estimated market value from the application. The project has applied for a value limitation under Chapter 313, Tax Code. The difference noted in the last line is the difference between the totals in Table 3 and Table 4.

Source: CPA, SABIC US Projects, LLC 1Tax Rate per $100 Valuation Disclaimer: This examination is based on information from the application submitted to the school district and forwarded to the comptroller. It is intended to meet the statutory requirement of Chapter 313 of the Tax Code and is not intended for any other purpose.

Year

Estimated Taxable Value

for I&S

Estimated Taxable Value

for M&O

Gregory-Portland ISD I&S Tax Levy

Gregory-Portland ISD

M&O Tax Levy

Gregory-Portland M&O

and I&S Tax Levies

San Patricio County Tax

Levy

San Patricio Drainage

District Tax Levy

Estimated Total Property Taxes

Tax Rate1 0.1800 1.1200 0.4600 0.54072022 $50,152,500 $50,152,500 $90,275 $561,708 $651,983 $230,702 $271,160 $1,153,8442023 $239,549,362 $239,549,362 $431,189 $2,682,953 $3,114,142 $1,101,927 $1,295,172 $5,511,2402024 $583,972,500 $30,000,000 $1,051,151 $336,000 $1,387,151 $2,686,274 $3,157,364 $7,230,7882025 $575,508,413 $30,000,000 $1,035,915 $336,000 $1,371,915 $2,647,339 $3,111,601 $7,130,8552026 $566,875,786 $30,000,000 $1,020,376 $336,000 $1,356,376 $2,607,629 $3,064,927 $7,028,9322027 $558,372,650 $30,000,000 $1,005,071 $336,000 $1,341,071 $2,568,514 $3,018,953 $6,928,5382028 $549,997,060 $30,000,000 $989,995 $336,000 $1,325,995 $2,529,986 $2,973,669 $6,829,6502029 $541,747,104 $30,000,000 $975,145 $336,000 $1,311,145 $2,492,037 $2,929,064 $6,732,2462030 $533,620,897 $30,000,000 $960,518 $336,000 $1,296,518 $2,454,656 $2,885,128 $6,636,3022031 $525,616,584 $30,000,000 $946,110 $336,000 $1,282,110 $2,417,836 $2,841,851 $6,541,7972032 $517,732,335 $30,000,000 $931,918 $336,000 $1,267,918 $2,381,569 $2,799,223 $6,448,7102033 $509,966,350 $30,000,000 $917,939 $336,000 $1,253,939 $2,345,845 $2,757,235 $6,357,0202034 $492,122,765 $492,122,765 $885,821 $5,511,775 $6,397,596 $2,263,765 $2,660,760 $11,322,1212035 $474,903,574 $474,903,574 $854,826 $5,318,920 $6,173,746 $2,184,556 $2,567,661 $10,925,9642036 $458,286,927 $458,286,927 $824,916 $5,132,814 $5,957,730 $2,108,120 $2,477,820 $10,543,6702037 $442,251,739 $442,251,739 $796,053 $4,953,219 $5,749,273 $2,034,358 $2,391,122 $10,174,7532038 $426,777,660 $426,777,660 $768,200 $4,779,910 $5,548,110 $1,963,177 $2,307,459 $9,818,746

Total $14,485,418 $32,301,299 $46,786,716 $37,018,289 $43,510,171 $127,315,176

Diff $0 $57,830,188 $57,830,188 $0 $0 $27,293,020

Table 4 Estimated Direct Ad Valorem Taxes with all property tax incentives sought

Attachment B – Tax Revenue before 25th Anniversary of Limitation Start This represents the Comptroller’s determination that SABIC US Projects, LLC (project) is reasonably likely to generate, before the 25th anniversary of the beginning of the limitation period, tax revenue in an amount sufficient to offset the school district maintenance and operations ad valorem tax revenue lost as a result of the agreement. This evaluation is based on an analysis of the estimated M&O portion of the school district property tax levy directly related to this project, using estimated taxable values provided in the application.

Source: CPA, SABIC US Projects, LLC Disclaimer: This examination is based on information from the application submitted to the school district and forwarded to the comptroller. It is intended to meet the statutory requirement of Chapter 313 of the Tax Code and is not intended for any other purpose.

2021 $0 $0 $0 $02022 $561,708 $561,708 $0 $02023 $2,682,953 $3,244,661 $0 $02024 $336,000 $3,580,661 $6,204,492 $6,204,4922025 $336,000 $3,916,661 $6,109,694 $12,314,1862026 $336,000 $4,252,661 $6,013,009 $18,327,1952027 $336,000 $4,588,661 $5,917,774 $24,244,9692028 $336,000 $4,924,661 $5,823,967 $30,068,9362029 $336,000 $5,260,661 $5,731,568 $35,800,5032030 $336,000 $5,596,661 $5,640,554 $41,441,0572031 $336,000 $5,932,661 $5,550,906 $46,991,9632032 $336,000 $6,268,661 $5,462,602 $52,454,5652033 $336,000 $6,604,661 $5,375,623 $57,830,1882034 $5,511,775 $12,116,436 $0 $57,830,1882035 $5,318,920 $17,435,356 $0 $57,830,1882036 $5,132,814 $22,568,169 $0 $57,830,1882037 $4,953,219 $27,521,389 $0 $57,830,1882038 $4,779,910 $32,301,299 $0 $57,830,1882039 $4,612,665 $36,913,963 $0 $57,830,1882040 $4,448,815 $41,362,779 $0 $57,830,1882041 $4,293,131 $45,655,910 $0 $57,830,1882042 $4,142,896 $49,798,806 $0 $57,830,1882043 $3,997,918 $53,796,724 $0 $57,830,1882044 $3,798,022 $57,594,745 $0 $57,830,1882045 $3,608,121 $61,202,866 $0 $57,830,1882046 $3,427,715 $64,630,581 $0 $57,830,1882047 $3,256,329 $67,886,910 $0 $57,830,1882048 $3,093,513 $70,980,422 $0 $57,830,188

$70,980,422 $57,830,188

Yes

Tax YearEstimated ISD M&O Tax Levy Generated

(Annual)

Estimated ISD M&O Tax Levy Generated

(Cumulative)

Estimated ISD M&O Tax Levy Loss as

Result of Agreement(Annual)

Estimated ISD M&O Tax Levy Loss as

Result of Agreement(Cumulative)

Analysis SummaryIs the project reasonably likely to generate tax revenue in an amount sufficient to offset the M&O levy loss as a result of the limitation agreement?

is greater than

LimitationPre-Years

Limitation Period(10 Years)

Maintain Viable Presence(5 Years)

Additional Years as Required by 313.026(c)(1)

(10 Years)

Attachment C – Limitation as a Determining Factor Tax Code 313.026 states that the Comptroller may not issue a certificate for a limitation on appraised value under this chapter for property described in an application unless the comptroller determines that “the limitation on appraised value is a determining factor in the applicant's decision to invest capital and construct the project in this state.” This represents the basis for the Comptroller’s determination. Methodology Texas Administrative Code 9.1055(d) states the Comptroller shall review any information available to the Comptroller including:

• the application, including the responses to the questions in Section 8 (Limitation as a Determining Factor);

• public documents or statements by the applicant concerning business operations or site location issues or in which the applicant is a subject;

• statements by officials of the applicant, public documents or statements by governmental or industry officials concerning business operations or site location issues;

• existing investment and operations at or near the site or in the state that may impact the proposed project;

• announced real estate transactions, utility records, permit requests, industry publications or other sources that may provide information helpful in making the determination; and

• market information, raw materials or other production inputs, availability, existing facility locations, committed incentives, infrastructure issues, utility issues, location of buyers, nature of market, supply chains, other known sites under consideration.

Determination The Comptroller has determined that the limitation on appraised value is a determining factor in SABIC US Projects, LLC’s decision to invest capital and construct the project in this state. This is based on information available, including information provided by the applicant. Specifically, the comptroller notes the following:

• Per SABIC US Projects, LLC in Tab 5 of their Application for a Limitation on Appraised Value: A. “The Project is still in an evaluation stage; only very preliminary development activities have

begun. No engineering, procurement or construction contracts have been negotiated or signed to support the Project. No regulatory permit applications have been filed. No public announcements of a definitive intent to construct the Project have been made. Agreements pertaining to preliminary design and engineering work and the development of other technical studies and estimates have been entered into; this work is necessary for purposes of determining whether the Project is technically viable and can be cost-competitive in the global marketplace.”

B. “The decision to invest in a particular country or state depends on the economics of the investment in the particular jurisdiction. In the case of the investment in the proposed project in Texas, the decision will be based on a number of commercial and financial considerations, including the ability to obtain relief regarding local property taxes.”

C. “Obtaining the Chapter 313 value limitation is a necessary part of the economic analysis for investment in Texas.”

D. “Property tax incentives, including the appraised value limitation, will allow the Applicant to tackle these long range requirements to make the Project viable in this community. The petrochemicals market is very competitive. Without the Chapter 313 value limitation, siting the project in San Patricio County is less attractive.”

• A July 29, 2016 The Coastal Bend Chronicle article states that “[t]hough nothing has been set in stone or put to paper, the new steam cracking plant proposal brought forth jointly by the Exxon Mobil Corp. and Saudi Arabia Basic Industries Corp., a Riyadh-based petrochemical company, is already in motion on the municipal level. According to Gregory City Manager City Administrator Robert Meager, a move by Portland City Officials to expand their Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) zone to encompass a 1000-acre area just West of Gregory is proof that Portland Officials are making plans to provide water and sewer to the new plant.”

• Attached Railroad Commission of Texas Public GIS Viewer map depicting Natural Gas pipelines. • Attached City of Portland Certificate of Convenience and Necessity zone 2016 expansion map.

Supporting Information

a) Section 8 of the Application for a Limitation on Appraised Value b) Attachments provided in Tab 5 of the Application for a Limitation on Appraised Value c) Additional information provided by the Applicant or located by the Comptroller

Disclaimer: This examination is based on information from the application submitted to the school district and forwarded to the comptroller. It is intended to meet the statutory requirement of Chapter 313 of the Tax Code and is not intended for any other purpose.

Attachment C – Limitation as a Determining Factor

Supporting Information

Section 8 of the Application for a Limitation on Appraised Value

For more information, visit our website: www.TexasAhead.org/tax_programs/chapter313/Page 4 • 50-296-A • 05-14/2

Economic Development and Analysis

Form 50-296-AA p p l i c a t i o n f o r A p p r a i s e d Va l u e L i m i t a t i o n o n Q u a l i f i e d P r o p e r t y

SECTION 6: Eligibility Under Tax Code Chapter 313.024

1. Are you an entity subject to the tax under Tax Code, Chapter 171? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

2. The property will be used for one of the following activities:

(1) manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

(2) research and development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

(3) a clean coal project, as defined by Section 5.001, Water Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

(4) an advanced clean energy project, as defined by Section 382.003, Health and Safety Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

(5) renewable energy electric generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

(6) electric power generation using integrated gasification combined cycle technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

(7) nuclear electric power generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

(8) a computer center that is used as an integral part or as a necessary auxiliary part for the activity conducted by applicant in one or more activities described by Subdivisions (1) through (7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

(9) a Texas Priority Project, as defined by 313.024(e)(7) and TAC 9.1051 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

3. Are you requesting that any of the land be classified as qualified investment? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

4. Will any of the proposed qualified investment be leased under a capitalized lease? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

5. Will any of the proposed qualified investment be leased under an operating lease? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

6. Are you including property that is owned by a person other than the applicant? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

7. Will any property be pooled or proposed to be pooled with property owned by the applicant in determining the amount of your qualified investment? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

SECTION 7: Project Description

1. In Tab 4, attach a detailed description of the scope of the proposed project, including, at a minimum, the type and planned use of real and tangible per-sonal property, the nature of the business, a timeline for property construction or installation, and any other relevant information.

2. Check the project characteristics that apply to the proposed project:

Land has no existing improvements Land has existing improvements (complete Section 13)

Expansion of existing operation on the land (complete Section 13) Relocation within Texas

SECTION 8: Limitation as Determining Factor

1. Does the applicant currently own the land on which the proposed project will occur? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

2. Has the applicant entered into any agreements, contracts or letters of intent related to the proposed project? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

3. Does the applicant have current business activities at the location where the proposed project will occur? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

4. Has the applicant made public statements in SEC filings or other documents regarding its intentions regarding the proposed project location? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

5. Has the applicant received any local or state permits for activities on the proposed project site? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

6. Has the applicant received commitments for state or local incentives for activities at the proposed project site? . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

7. Is the applicant evaluating other locations not in Texas for the proposed project? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

8. Has the applicant provided capital investment or return on investment information for the proposed project in comparison with other alternative investment opportunities? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

9. Has the applicant provided information related to the applicant’s inputs, transportation and markets for the proposed project? . . . . Yes No

10. Are you submitting information to assist in the determination as to whether the limitation on appraised value is a determining factor in the applicant’s decision to invest capital and construct the project in Texas? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yes No

Chapter 313.026(e) states “the applicant may submit information to the Comptroller that would provide a basis for an affirmative determination

under Subsection (c)(2).” If you answered “yes” to any of the questions in Section 8, attach supporting information in Tab 5.

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

Attachment C – Limitation as a Determining Factor

Supporting Information

Attachments provided in Tab 5 of the Application for a

Limitation on Appraised Value

SABIC US Projects LLC Chapter 313 Application to Gregory-Portland ISD

Cummings Westlake, LLC

ATTACHMENT TO APPLICATION FOR APPRAISED VALUE LIMITATION ON QUALIFIED PROPERTY BY SABIC US PROJECTS LLC TO GREGORY-PORTLAND ISD

TAB 5

Documentation to assist in determining if limitation is a determining factor. Ranked among the world’s largest petrochemicals manufacturers, SABIC is a public company based in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 70% of the Company’s shares are owned by the Saudi Arabian government, with the remaining 30% held by private investors in Saudi Arabia and other countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council. SABIC’s 2015 revenues were over $39 billion.1 SABIC began in 1976 by Royal decree and is now rated by Forbes magazine as the 3rd largest diversified chemical company in the world. Today, the company has operations in over 50 countries with a global workforce of over 40,000 talented individuals.

SABIC has chemical manufacturing operations in 21 countries including the United States, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Austria, Germany, Bahrain, United Kingdom, Northern Ireland, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Saudi Arabia, China, Japan, Thailand, Singapore, South Korea, and India. SABIC has the option to invest capital in manufacturing plants on a worldwide basis.

SABIC is now evaluating the economics of this Project. SABIC owns and operates petrochemical manufacturing facilities around the world as well as in the United States. SABIC is also considering investing in Louisiana. Please see the attached press release regarding competitive siting decisions in the following press releases and news articles.

The Project is still in an evaluation stage; only very preliminary development activities have begun. No engineering, procurement or construction contracts have been negotiated or signed to support the Project. No regulatory permit applications have been filed. No public announcements of a definitive intent to construct the Project have been made. Agreements pertaining to preliminary design and engineering work and the development of other technical studies and estimates have been entered into; this work is necessary for purposes of determining whether the Project is technically viable and can be cost-competitive in the global marketplace. The site requires a tremendous amount of infrastructure to support the proposed development that is not currently available. Water supply is crucial and will require millions of gallons by pipeline into the site daily. Moving products to and from the site require more investment than at other proposed locations. Property tax incentives, including the appraised value limitation, will allow the Applicant to tackle these long range requirements to make the Project viable in this community.

The decision to invest in a particular country or state depends on the economics of the investment in the particular jurisdiction. In the case of the investment in the proposed project in Texas, the decision will be based on a number of commercial and financial considerations, including the ability to obtain relief regarding local property taxes. Obtaining the Chapter 313 value limitation is a necessary part of the economic analysis for investment in Texas. The petrochemicals market is very competitive. Without the Chapter 313 value limitation, siting the project in San Patricio County is less attractive.

Contacts

(

OUR OIL

San Patricio in running for Exxon steam cracker facility

Contributed photo San Patricio County is one of three communities in the running to become home to an Exxon Mobil steam cracker.

By Chris Ramirez of the Caller-TimesJuly 27, 2016

San Patricio County is on the shortlist of communities to become home to the world's largest steam cracker plant.

Exxon Mobil Corp. and Saudi Arabia Basic Industries Corp., a Riyadh-based petrochemical company, announced in a joint statement Tuesday they plan to build a complex together on the U.S. Gulf Coast.

Victoria and St. James Parish, Louisiana also are in the running.

The companies say the region interests them because of its abundant supply of natural gas, and that their planned facility intends capture competitive feedstock of the commodity.

"We're trying very hard to get that project to come here," said Foster Edwards, president/CEO of the San Patricio County Economic Development Corp. "We've got a lot of vacant land they could use. There's a lot of good qualities they could take advantage of here."

Edwards hoped the community's close ties with the Port of Corpus Christi and the efforts made in recent years to improve the LaQuinta Terminal would help it stand apart from its competitors.

In a statement, Exxon and SABIC said the facility, when finished, would be capable of producing 1.8 million tons per year of ethylene and would feed a monoethylene glycol plant and two polyethylene plants.

Monoethylene glycol can be used to make polyester for clothing and polyethylene terephthalate for beverage bottles and containers. Polyethylene can be used in a range of applications, including packaging, consumer and industrial products, agricultural film, and building and construction materials.

A common thread shared by each community is their availability of undeveloped land and water access. The parcel St. James Parish is offering is in an unincorporated area along the banks of the Mississippi River. Victoria, which has had relationships with petrochemical companies for more than six decades, recently

added liquid and dry bulk cargo docks and improved roads at its port.

It also has beefed up industrial training programs at Victoria College in hopes of building up its workforce.

"Projects of this scale are transformational for any community," said D. Dale Fowler, president of the Victoria Economic Development Corp.

Margaret Ross, an Exxon Mobil spokeswoman, said officials are in the early stages of the process and plan to study each area extensively before making a final decision.

San Patricio County's proximity to the Eagle Ford Shale, along with its growing industrial workforce and the infrastructure the port provides, may be among its greatest advantages, energy expert Ray Perryman said.

Many believe the 3,000-square-mile Eagle Ford Shale energy play contains about 20 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and more than 3 billion barrels of oil.

The port also is in the final stages of a $28 million expansion of its railroad system and is building several new docks. Last year, the port authority also issued $115 million in revenue bonds both to buy land and to help finance a variety of capital projects over the next decade.

"Corpus Christi offers the right combination of nearby feedstocks and the right infrastructure and should definitely be considered for the ... project," said Perryman, CEO of The Perryman Group, an economic and financial analysis firm in Waco. "The area has attracted billions of dollars of similar

investments in recent years, which is a testament to its competitiveness."

Twitter: @Caller_ChrisRam

About Chris RamirezChris Ramirez is the Business reporter for the Caller-Times and is the team leader for our Energy Effects coverage.

Facebook @Caller_ChrisRam

chris.ramirez@caller.c... 361-886-3667

Find this article at:

Attachment C – Limitation as a Determining Factor

Supporting Information

Additional information provided by the Applicant or located by the Comptroller

Proposed EXXON Plant To Be Located Outside Portland-Gregory; Says City Administrator

http://thecoastalbendchronicle.com/25220/225165/a/proposed-exxon-plant-to-be-located-outside-portland-gregory-says-city-administra[10/11/2016 12:41:53 PM]

WEEKLY NEWS HEADLINES Lady Javelinas Volleyball Tops UTPB and Sweeps Weekend

Tuesday, Oct 11, 2016 Home RSS Login Signup

HOME NEWS SERVICES BUSINESS ARCHIVES OPINION & EDITORIAL

WEATHER GALLERY CONTACT

Proposed EXXON Plant To Be Located OutsidePortland-Gregory; Says City Administrator

July 29, 2016 | By Staff Correspondent

WEEKLY NEWSHIGHLIGHTS

A Few Words ForNational NightOut On Behalf OfSouth Texas Cops

Proposed EXXON Plant To Be Located Outside Portland-Gregory; Says City Administrator

http://thecoastalbendchronicle.com/25220/225165/a/proposed-exxon-plant-to-be-located-outside-portland-gregory-says-city-administra[10/11/2016 12:41:53 PM]

GREGORY, Texas- A proposed projectto place the world's largest steamcracker plant in San Patricio County isnow believed to be going just two milesoutside of the City of Portland and Westof The City of Gregory, a move that hasGregory City Manager CityAdministrator Robert Meager

concerned.

In a press release issued on July 25, by EXXON Mobile, the company hasconfirmed that Texas and Louisiana are in the running for a proposed steamcracking plant and reports indicates that San Patricio County is believed to beone of the proposed locations. Victoria, Texas and Saint James Parrish inLouisiana are considered to be the two other sites identified.

In an interview with the Caller-Times, San Patricio County EconomicDevelopment Corporation President-CEO Foster Edwards stated "We'retrying very hard to get that project to come here," said Edwards. "We've got alot of vacant lands they could use. There's a lot of good qualities they couldtake advantage of here."

Edwards told the Caller that he hoped the community's close ties with the Portof Corpus Christi and the efforts made in recent years to improve theLaQuinta Terminal would help it stand apart from its competitors.

Though nothing has been set in stone or put to paper, the new steam crackingplant proposal brought forth jointly by the Exxon Mobil Corp. and SaudiArabia Basic Industries Corp., a Riyadh-based petrochemical company, isalready in motion on the municipal level.

According to Gregory City Manager City Administrator Robert Meager, amove by Portland City Officials to expand their Certificate of Convenienceand Necessity (CCN) zone to encompass a 1000-acre area just West ofGregory is proof that Portland Officials are making plans to provide water andsewer to the new plant.

Early MorningCry For HelpLeads To ArrestOf Man ForFelony Assault

Boy Scout EarnsEagle AfterCompletingAmbitious ProjectFor Kids

Student At Large:Who Doesn'tTruly EnjoySeafair?

Alert OfficersArrest Man ForEvading AndDWI AfterDomestic Dispute

Required PhysicalFitnessAssessment forthe 2016-2017School Year

Proposed EXXON Plant To Be Located Outside Portland-Gregory; Says City Administrator

http://thecoastalbendchronicle.com/25220/225165/a/proposed-exxon-plant-to-be-located-outside-portland-gregory-says-city-administra[10/11/2016 12:41:53 PM]

Meager confirmed reports that a landowner and resident in the area has toldmany people that he is in negotiations to sell property located Northwest ofFM 2986 and Highway 181 to the EXXON Corp. for the production of thenew plant. Meager says that once he learned of the plans he questionedPortland City Officials after they moved to expand their CCN so far outside ofthe Portland City Limits.

"The fact that they moved to expand their zone of control to provide citysewer and water to the area was a sign that something big was coming, butwhat was coming was my question," said Meager.

According to Meager, a dialog was opened, and a meeting occurred betweenhimself, Portland City Manager Randy Wright, Portland Mayor DavidKrebbs, and Assistant City Manager DeLatte last month. During that meeting,Portland City Officials were close to chest about the reasoning why the movewas being done, and would not discuss future development plans withMeager.

"They said they could not discuss it, and told me they were under non-disclosure agreements," stated Meager. "Everyone is talking about the project,and I would have to say I'm 99% positive that is where it's going when ithappens," he said.

According to Portland City Officials, the move is only routine and was doneas part of an area-wide expansion of the city's CCN, not to accommodateanything in particular.

SAN PATRICIO COUNTYATTORNEY RACE

Subscribe To OurNewsletter For FREE

Click Here

Who Do You Plan To VoteFor In 2016?

Incumbent David Aken

Candidate Tamara Cochran-May

Vote for Pedro!

I Plan To Be In Jail

Proposed EXXON Plant To Be Located Outside Portland-Gregory; Says City Administrator

http://thecoastalbendchronicle.com/25220/225165/a/proposed-exxon-plant-to-be-located-outside-portland-gregory-says-city-administra[10/11/2016 12:41:53 PM]

"A CCN is a way that a government entity guarantees its returns on capitalinvestments by assuring that infrastructure built inside the city deliver a returnon investment," stated Portland Assistant City Manager Brian DeLatte.

DeLatte showed that at least three areas were part of the expansion and thatthough there is some debate on exactly what will be encompassed in the movethat all sides will discuss options to reach a mutual understanding.

"What we are dealing with are overlapping map issues about the CCN of thesurrounding areas, and we will be working with all the parties to assure thatthings are worked out," stated DeLatte.

As for specifics of the area Northwest of FM 2986 and Highway 181, DeLattesaid that he was under a non-disclosure agreement and could not comment onthis subject.

Meager agreed with DeLatte, and said that currently the City of Gregory is inthe process of acquiring a CCN and is waiting for approval, but that what isalready in place for services being provided to residents by Gregory will overlap with the new move by Portland, an issue that will have to be addressedaccording to Meager.

"Their plans call for expanding into areas that we intended to cover, so if theyare going to move in that direction they will have to take responsibility forthose who are already receiving services from us," stated Meager.

Proposed EXXON Plant To Be Located Outside Portland-Gregory; Says City Administrator

http://thecoastalbendchronicle.com/25220/225165/a/proposed-exxon-plant-to-be-located-outside-portland-gregory-says-city-administra[10/11/2016 12:41:53 PM]

In prior interviews, San Patricio County Judge Terry Simpson and PortlandCity Manager Randy Wright also refused to comment saying that they toowere under non-disclosure agreements in regards to projects concerning thattract of land or the EXXON Corporation.

According to Meager, he is positive that the location Northwest of FM 2986and Highway 181 is slated for the new project once it is approved, but hasgrave concerns about the effect it will have on Gregory.

Meager pointed out that to the North of the city wind farms are already takenclaim to the land, and that to the East, TPCO has built its operations, leavingonly the South and the West for Gregory to grow.

"Where is the City of Gregory going to grow?" stated Meager. "To the Southis Portland, now to the West you are going to put an EXXON facility, sowhere do we grow when all surrounding directions have been developed?", hesaid.

Meager pointed out that not only would there be nowhere to grow for the Cityof Gregory but that the proposed project has been negotiated with no inputfrom Gregory Officials what-so-ever.

Proposed EXXON Plant To Be Located Outside Portland-Gregory; Says City Administrator

http://thecoastalbendchronicle.com/25220/225165/a/proposed-exxon-plant-to-be-located-outside-portland-gregory-says-city-administra[10/11/2016 12:41:53 PM]

"Not once did anyone approach us about this project and its plan to be placedright next door to us and block our ability to grow," stated Meager. "We hadto find out about the project from the land owners, not those who are involvedin the project," he said.

Meager says that he is all for industry and growth in the area, but believes itshouldn't come at such grave costs to the residents in Gregory that he serves.

"I asked Randy (Wright) how would he feel if all of a sudden Corpus Christijust decided to put a 1000-acre industrial facility right next door to Portlandand how would he feel?" said Meager. "He agreed that he wouldn't behappy..so no one should be surprised that we are not for this project if itmeans boxing us in," he said.

Meager believes that the negotiations of the proposed project should havebeen done with Gregory and that Gregory should have the same ability tooffer city sewer and water services to the project once it is completed.

As for Portland, Meager says he enjoys a good relationship with Portland CityOfficials, but that he believes more work needs to be done to address theconcerns of the residents of Gregory in the future.

"We have always had a good relationship with Portland, and this willcontinue," stated Meager. "I think it's pretty obvious though that this project isin fact slated for this particular area, as all the signs point this way..and wecannot approve unless the concerns of Gregory are met," he said.

Meager would not further elaborate why is was so certain that the proposedproject was slated for that particular area, only saying that he was certain itwas, but wasn't at liberty to say exactly how he knew, just that he did know.

If approved and the project moves forward, the new EXXON Plant operation

Proposed EXXON Plant To Be Located Outside Portland-Gregory; Says City Administrator

http://thecoastalbendchronicle.com/25220/225165/a/proposed-exxon-plant-to-be-located-outside-portland-gregory-says-city-administra[10/11/2016 12:41:53 PM]

will encompass approximately 1000-acres and be approximately two milesoutside the Portland City Limits, and situated within a half mile of the City ofGregory.

Below is the exact wording of the EXXON Press Release, as well as a photoof an EXXON Stem Cracking Plant already in operation.

SABIC and ExxonMobil EvaluatingPetrochemical Joint Venture on U.S. Gulf

CoastPotential new complex would be located in Texas or Louisiana nearnatural gas feedstockProject would include a steam cracker and derivative unitsPlans in early stages, final investment decision to follow studycompletion

HOUSTON, Texas – July 25, 2016 – SABIC and an affiliate of Exxon MobilCorporation (ExxonMobil) are considering the potential development of ajointly owned petrochemical complex on the U.S. Gulf Coast. If developed,the project would be located in Texas or Louisiana near natural gas feedstockand include a world-scale steam cracker and derivative units.

Before making final investment decisions, the companies will conductnecessary studies and work with state and local officials to help identify apotential site with adequate infrastructure access.

“We are focused on geographic diversification to supply new markets,” saidYousef Abdullah Al-Benyan, SABIC vice chairman and chief executiveofficer. “The proposed venture would capture competitive feedstock andreinforce SABIC’s strong position in the value chain.”

Neil Chapman, president of ExxonMobil Chemical Company, said: “We havethe capability to design a project with a unique set of attributes that wouldmake it competitive globally. That is vitally important as most of the chemicaldemand growth in the next several decades is anticipated to come fromdeveloping economies.”

ExxonMobil and SABIC have worked together for 35 years in major chemicaljoint ventures in Saudi Arabia.

###About SABIC

SABIC ranks among the world’s top petrochemical companies, and is amongthe world’s market leaders in the production of polyethylene, polypropylene,advanced thermoplastics, glycols, methanol and fertilizers. SABIC

Proposed EXXON Plant To Be Located Outside Portland-Gregory; Says City Administrator

http://thecoastalbendchronicle.com/25220/225165/a/proposed-exxon-plant-to-be-located-outside-portland-gregory-says-city-administra[10/11/2016 12:41:53 PM]

manufactures on a global scale in Saudi Arabia, the Americas, Europe andAsia Pacific. The company operates in more than 50 countries across theworld with 40,000 employees worldwide. To learn more, visitwww.sabic.com

About ExxonMobil Chemical Company

ExxonMobil Chemical Company is one of the largest petrochemicalcompanies worldwide. The company holds leadership positions in some of thelargest-volume and highest-growth commodity petrochemical products in theworld. ExxonMobil Chemical Company has manufacturing capacity in everymajor region of the world, serving large and growing markets. More than 90percent of the Company’s chemical capacity is integrated with large refineriesor natural gas processing plants. To learn more, visitwww.exxonmobilchemical.com.

[Retrieved 10/26/2016 http://wwwgisp.rrc.state.tx.us/GISViewer2/ Commodity: Natural Gas Pipelines]

City of Portland Certificate of Convenience and Necessity zone expansion map. Retrieved 10/11/2016 http://thecoastalbendchronicle.com/25220/225165/a/proposed-exxon-plant-to-be-located-outside-portland-gregory-says-city-administra